There are no rules for protesting indignities and injustices. Emily Post was no help to Harry Bridges or Tommie Smith (Google 'em and learn).

So while there is wide agreement that Donald Sterling should be hit with serious sanctions, and that the Clippers are right to register their anger, who can define the proper protest?

Warriors coach Mark Jackson took a shot at it Monday, saying that fans should boycott Tuesday's Game 5 at Staples Center in Los Angeles.

Said Jackson, "I believe the fans, the loudest statement they could make as far as fans is to not show up to the game. ... As an African American man that's a fan of the game of basketball, and knows its history, and knows what's right and what's wrong, I would not come to the game tomorrow. Whether I was a Clipper fan or Warrior fan."

Is Jackson over-reacting or under-reacting? Are the Clippers, as I heard radio-show callers say, cowardly and even unmanly for not sitting out a game? Or are the players making their strongest statement by playing hard?

We shall overcome ... but how?

The NBA will announce Tuesday morning its decision on Sterling. The league constitution is not public, but some reports say it does not allow the league to force an owner to sell his team. Other legal experts say there is a provision that could allow the owners to push Sterling out.

Best guess here? A one-year suspension for Sterling.

That will not cut it. Any league action short of 86ing Sterling, instantly and forever, will set off a storm.

Baseball got rid of two destructive team owners, Frank McCourt and Marge Schott. MLB took control of McCourt's Dodgers and eventually forced him to sell. Schott was suspended and then pushed to sell her Cincinnati Reds.